The South Wales Star

OUR POOR LAWS. The history of our Poor Laws affords us one of the most striking instances of the way in which good and bad legislation differently affect the progress and prosperity of the country. It would be too long a story for our present purpose to trace the steps which led up to our first general Poor Law of 1601 in the 43rd year of the reign of her Majesty Queen Elizabeth. We will only point out that at a time when English trade and commercial enterprise began to develope, it was first found needful to apply State machinery for the relief of the poor. The main principle of the Poor Law of lli01 was that the workhouse should be made the test of real poverty or privation. Workhouses were established in every parish and the able-bodied poor, before obtaining relief, were compelled to enter the workhouse. This was simply a rough-and-ready method of ascertaining whether the applicant for relief was really in need of parish support or not. With a few modifications, this was the Poor Law system of England until 1782, when Gilbert's Act was passed. No law, passed with a good object, ever had such a disastrous effect. It was thought unreasonable and unfair that labourers—who were forbidden by the statutes of Charles II. from migrating in search of work from their native parish, and whose wages were artificially kept down by the magistrates in Quarter Sessions -for all wages were determined absolutely by the "Great Unpaid "-should be put to the indignity of entering the poor house in order to obtain relief. Parliament now rushed to the other extreme. If an able-bodied poor man failed to find work, the overseer on application was com- pelled to find work for him. If no work could be obtained, then the overseer was directed to administer the necessary relief to the family. This relief varied with the number of children and in the case of illegitimate children, relief was granted ol on a higher scale. More than all, the workhouse test was abolished. The conse- quences of unwise and shortsighted phi- lanthropy nearly overwhelmed England in ruin. A premium was set on early and improvident marriages and on illegitimacy and pauper labour was encouraged at the expense of free iind independent labour, for it was found that [i pauper, working at a small remuneration which was largely supplemented by grants from the rates, earned far more than the honest worker who was too sturdy and too independent bo stoop to ask for alms from the parish. The Poor Rates also in 50 years increased from 1:2,100,000 to the enormous amount of £ 8,000,000. Such evils demanded a bold and thorough remedy and the recommendations of the Royal Commission, which was appointed in 1833 to inquire into the working of Gilbert's Act, became the basis of the amended Poor Law of 1834. The workhouse test was restored the grants in aid of wages were abolished paid overseers were appointed, who were placed under the supervision of a Board of Guardians and a central board of Commissioners, sitting in London, were entrusted with a general superin- tendence of the system. Though many of these provisions were harsh-and the Tories did not fail at the time to say so—yet they were perhaps necessary at the time to stem the tide of pauperism which was sweeping over the country. With few alterations the Poor Law of 1834 is the Poor Law of to-day. Mr. Alfred Thomas, in his remarkably able and lucid exposition of his proposed Poor Law Bill, which we publish in another column, wishes to amend the existing law in these respects (1) In the increase of the authority of the Board of Guardians. He contends that the administration of the law by the local instead of by the central ,authority would be cheaper, more efficient, and more humane. This is simply an extension of the principle on which all Liberals are agreed, and which the Conservative Government has conceded, of decentralising, as far as possible, our system of local government. (2) In the constitution of the Board of Guardians. The ex-ojficio members, i.e. the magistrates— should be abolished. This also embodies an old Liberal principle that the administration and distribution of the public money should be entrusted only to the representatives of the people. (3) In the method of electing the members of the Board of Guardians. Election should be by ballot and a registration officer should be appointed, whose duty it would be to compile a list of voters if they failed to do this, a penalty should be exacted. Both these are principles on which the Liberal party have long been agreed. It is an anomaly and a shame that after giving the ratepayer the right to vote, the State should not also undertake to render it possible for him to exercise his right. (4) In the qualifications of the voters. The property qualification is to be removed, and a three months' occupancy (instead of six months) is to be declared sufficient. It is needless to re- mind our readers that these are what Liberals want in demanding one man, one vote." (5) In the methods of claiming a settlement or a right to relief. There are now seven ways of showing a right to relief. Mr. Thomas wishes to abolish these—which are simply relics of the old Settlement Acts of Charles II. and recognise only one qualification, viz., a few months' residence in the union district. (Ii) In the condition of the paupers themselves. Mr. Thomas proposes to establish a class of State pensions, and though this, to our mind, is perhaps the most valuable of all the proposed amendments, it is at the same time the one that will require the most delicate handling. We believe that an honest toiler, who has grown grey in tilling the land or working at his trade, should not have to resort to any degrading shifts for obtaining parish support. Most of our readers are doubtless acquainted with many an honest soul who would sooner starve than live even for a week in the poorhouse. We are of opinion that the soldiers of industry have rendered their country as good service and probably more benefit than the soldiers of war and they are equally entitled to pensions when their life's work is done and they can serve their country no more. But care Should be exercised that only the deserving poor should be thus pensioned the thriftless and the idle should be made to feel that it would be unde- sirable to become a pauper. Such is the broad outline of Mr. Alfred Thomas' proposed Bill. We feel sure that the more widely it becomes known, and the closer the investigation made into its principles, the more general will be its acceptation, not only among Liberals, but among all who feel the need of alleviating the miseries of the poor. THE CHURCH CONCERT AT CADOXTOX. As will be seen in a report in another column, the concert for the Church Building Fuud which was held on Wednesday night was a brilliant success. We have never seen a better gathering at Cadoxton, in every respect, than was assembled at the Board Schoolroom on the night in question. We would not wish to introduce any polemical matter, but we cannot help drawing attention to what the spokesman of the concert committee said. Mr. Llewellyn, in his graceful speech of thanks to the inhabi- tants of Cadoxton and the district for their support, said that he had received the most generous and ungrudging assistance from Non- conformists as well as from Churchmen. He went on to say that the Committee would again appeal confidently for help to the public, as the Church at Holton was to be built, and provided for on the voluntary system. And we are equally sure that the appeal will not be made in vain. Churchmen ought to understand that the Non- conformists of Wales do not entertain the slightest hostility towards the Church as a religious institution. They are only too glad to aid to the utmost of their power any institution which teaches the fear of God, and the moral advancement of the world. But Mr. Llewellyn touched the root of their hostility to the Establishment when he said thet the Committee appealed to them to support the voluntary principle. If the Church was provided for voluntarily, there would not be the slightest opposition to it. It is because men are com- pelled to contribute to the Church, that Non- formists are driven to show their opposition. Surely, the success of Church work in a new, unendowed district like Holton should en- courage Churchmen to throw away the crutches which impede, rather than help their progress, and rely on the voluntary goodwill of their members. We hear these days a great deal of the success which meets the efforts of the Church. For ourselves, we rejoice to hear that such is the case. There is plenty of good work to be done in our boasted land of civiliza- tion and Christianity. But where has the Church made the greatest progress in Wales ? Is it not in those new new districts, such as Barry and the Rhondda, where the ever- increasing population necessitates the building of new churches, whose revenues are not drawn from compulsory tithes or old national endow- ments, but from the voluntary offerings of pious Church folk ? The experience of the Church in such places should open the eyes of Churchmen to the true facts of the case. The Church, like every other institution, flourishes most where it has to work the hardest. We are confident that, when the Church is freed from the schackles which now bind it to the earth and to earthly concerns, will rise to its higher and nobler and purer spiritual work. This is what we meant by saying in our Confession of Faith that the Church would be once more the messenger of p3ace and good- will among men. We did not mean to say that the Church does not preach peace and goodwill; but that the fact that it is invidiously endowed, made its own members, in many cases, think more of material than of spiritual advancement, while it prevented at the same time that cordial co-operation with other religious bodies, which is so necessary in these dark days of scepticism and infidelity. THE BRIDGEND WORKHOUSE. The report of Mr. Bircham, the Inspector of the Local Government Board, reveals a very unsatisfactory state of things at the Bridgend Workhouse. We do not wish to lay the blame on anyone in particular but certainly, if the Workhouse is in the condition which Mr. Bircham says it is in his report-and Mr. Bircham only tells what he himself saw—there must be some grave fault somewhere. Accord- ording to his report-which we publish. elsewhere—there are no able-bodied men in the Workhouse, and out of the 3a inmates 22 are bedridden or otherwise helpless. There are only three able-bodied women, and there is no trained nurse. The consequence is that old and infirm men," who have come to the Work- house to spend their short spell of life in some comfort, are employed to sit up during night- time with serious sick cases." The bed-clothing of the sick and the floors of the wards are not in the state that they should be in while the personal cleanliness of the patients leaves much to be desired. The condition of the sick wards themselves is very unsatisfactory the walls and floor are damp owing to the earth outside being higher than the floor level." No one can read the report without shuddering at the hard condition of the poor fellows whose mis- fortune has compelled them to seek the protection (!) of the poor-house in their old age and infirmity. The poor- house should be a home to the needy and infirm poor it is horrible to think that after submit- ting to the indignity of entering the Workouse, the poor inmates have to drag out their weary length of life in grinding drudgery, or to lie on their unclean beds, unattended except by feeble old men, and surrounded by dark cold walls, and all the squallid and filthy circum- stances of wretched misery. We do not agree with the inspector's proposed remedy. He said that there was too much out-door relief, and seemed to indicate that the able-bodied poor suould be brought into the poor- house to assist in keeping the place in order. That is far from being what we would propose. We do not, of course, think that the life of a pauper should be made so easy as to induce independent workers to sink into pauperism. But we' do think that the aged poor should as much as possible be spared what is to them the degradation of entering *the Workhouse. A trained nurse should attend to the patients, competent officials should be appointed to see that the house is properly kept, and the appliances for saving labour should be made as perfect as possible. The report was ordered to stand over for considera- tion by the new board. We hope that in this case the new broom will sweep clean," and that we shall hear no more of what must be characterised as a disgraceful state of affairs. WILSONS CASE.. The secretary and the real governor of the National Seamen's Union, after a trial of some days at Cardiff, has been sentenced to six weeks' imprisonment. Mr. Wilson asked the Recorder to add hard labonr to his sentence, but the Recorder refused, as he had not the power to do so. One is therefore surprised that—if the Recorder had not the legal authority to pass a sentence with hard labour—he should have sthought himself justified in passing such a. heavy sentence. The verdict and the sentence will come to most people with surprise. The plaintiffs had accused Mr. Wilson, first of all, with riot, but they had to withdraw that charge. The next charged him with unlawful assembling, and they have succeeded, in spite of the contradictory evidence, in convicting him. What is an unlawful assembly ? It has been described as any assembly for a lawful or unlawful purpose—which will cause a man of a courageous nature to fear. But who is a. courageous man, and who is not ? Possibly the Lord Mayor of London who accidentally met a hare on Hounslow Heath, and blustered out,. With the help of my good sword and strong right arm will I overcome thee, oh mine enemy," thought himself a most valorous man. And people of this stamp seem to live in Cardiff. But even supposing that the gathering was an "unlawful assembly," why was Mr. Wilson singled. out ? Why were others, who were equally prominent and equally well-known, not included in the charge ? If the object was to crush Mr. Wilson, it has lamentably failed. Mr. Wilson will come out of prison, like William O'Brien and John Dillon, a greater power than, he was before. He will have suffered for his opinions, a sure proof of earnestness and sin- cerity and his six weeks' imprisonment will appeal more eloquently than anything to the sympathies of the masses who support him. 0 LLANDINAM'S GOOD WORKS. The thoughtful generosity of Mr. David Davies was not destined to die with him. It will be seen, by a letter from Mr. Edward Davies, which we publish in another column, that the same spirit of philanthropy animates